| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [bug fix] Savepoint-related statements terminates connection |
| Date: | 2017-09-01 07:09:07 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTuAa7VQzKDonoOm-ohucmDZfvFSqVKiong-N21GMawXA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm not sure I see the use case for anyone using SAVEPOINTs in this
> context, so simply throwing a good error message is enough.
>
> Clearly nobody is using this, so lets just lock the door. I don't
> think fiddling with the transaction block state machine is anything
> anybody wants to do in back branches, at least without a better reason
> than this.
I don't think you can say that, per se the following recent report:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH2-V61vxNEnTfj2V-zd+mA-g6kQMJgd5SvXoU3JBvdzQH0Yfw@mail.gmail.com
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2017-09-01 07:42:39 | Re: pgbench: Skipping the creating primary keys after initialization |
| Previous Message | Haribabu Kommi | 2017-09-01 07:01:03 | Re: utility commands benefiting from parallel plan |